Typically, a buyer visits one or more retail stores to shop for a product. When the buyer finds the product he or she is looking for, at a reasonable price, the buyer purchases the product from the retail store. This traditional method, however, may require that the buyer visit a number of retail stores to determine a reasonable price for the product. Moreover, a retail store must attract buyers, such as by spending money on advertising. For example, when a new retail store opens for business, many buyers will not know what types of products are sold by the retail store. In addition, the traditional method does not let a party other than the retail store, such as a product manufacturer, establish a pricing relationship directly with a buyer. For example, a manufacturer may sell a product to a retail store (perhaps through a distributor) that ultimately determines the price at which the product is sold to a buyer.
Recently, products have been sold to buyers via communication networks such as the Internet (e.g., via an online Web merchant). Internet sales have been growing steadily over the past few years, and are expected to increase, because buyers are attracted to the ease and convenience of shopping online. For example, a buyer can shop online from the comfort of home and receive information from a number of Web merchants to determine a reasonable price for a product.
The sale of products from Web merchants to buyers, however, has a number of disadvantages. For example, in a typical sale via the Internet, a traditional retail store (e.g., a retail store which is not online) is typically left completely out of the transaction. In addition to losing a potential profit from the sale of the product itself, such a retail store loses the chance to sell additional products to the buyer, such as product accessories (e.g., batteries). Moreover, the retail store cannot sell unrelated products that attract the buyer's attention while he or she is in the store. This may still be a problem even if the retail store invested the time and money required to establish an online service. Moreover, a retail store's online service may simply shift sales that would have otherwise occurred at the actual store (as opposed to attracting new buyers).
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/337,906 filed Jun. 22, 1999 and entitled “Purchasing Systems and Methods Wherein a Buyer Takes Possession at a Retailer of a Product Purchased Using a Communication Network” describes systems wherein a buyer takes possession of a product at a retailer. The purchasing system communicates with a buyer through a communication network to establish a first price for a product between the buyer and a seller. For example, the purchasing system may evaluate a buyer offer, including an offer price, related to the product. If the buyer offer is acceptable, the purchasing system arranges for the buyer to take possession of the product at a retailer, different from the seller, that offers the product for sale at a second price. The buyer provides a payment, based on the first price, to the purchasing system in exchange for the right to take possession of the product at the retailer.
No matter what type of system is used to sell a product, some buyers may not be willing, or able, to pay a retail price for the product (e.g., a merchant's retail price). One way to address this problem is to reduce the retail price associated with the product. Unfortunately, reducing the retail price also reduces any profit from the sale of the product, and the reduced profit may not be offset by any increase in the number of products that are sold.
Instead of simply reducing the retail price, a merchant (or manufacturer) may distribute coupons that discount the price associated with the product. This also reduces any profit with respect to those transactions in which a coupon is redeemed. Moreover, the discount associated with a coupon is traditionally revealed to buyers, preventing the discount from being adjusted as appropriate (e.g., by increasing the discount if the coupon is not generating sales or by adjusting the discount based on information associated with a particular buyer). In addition, the value of a coupon is generally determined when the coupon is provided to a buyer, and not when the buyer redeems the coupon. This also prevents the discount from being adjusted as may be appropriate (e.g., based on supply, demand or any other information at the time of redemption).
Instead of reducing the price associated with a product, it is also known that a merchant can offer a promotion to encourage a buyer to purchase a product. For example, a merchant may advertise a “buy one get one free” promotion or provide a discount to buyers who establish a credit card account associated with the merchant. Similarly, a number of merchants can work together to offer a promotion. For example, a first merchant may advertise that if a buyer purchases a first product from the first merchant, a second product can be purchased at a reduced price from, or be given away by, a second merchant.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/219,267 filed Dec. 23, 1998 and entitled “Method and Apparatus for Facilitating Electronic Commerce Through Providing Cross-Benefits During a Transaction” describes systems wherein a merchant server of a first merchant receives an indication of products that a buyer is to purchase via a Web site. In response, the merchant server provides an offer for a benefit from a second merchant, such as by providing a cross-benefit or subsidy offer. If the buyer indicates acceptance of the subsidy offer, the benefit is applied to the product or products being purchased. In exchange, the buyer agrees to participate in a transaction with the second merchant.
However, the buyer may not actually participate in the transaction with the second merchant as he or she agreed. For example, the customer may forget to participate in the transaction or later change his or her mind about the agreement. In this case, the first merchant may want to recover the benefit that was applied to the product or products being purchased. However, the first merchant may not be able to locate the customer or may be otherwise unable to recover the benefit from the customer.